=== ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Tromey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Robert Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 8:22 AM Subject: Re: PR224
> >>>>> "Rob" == Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> ... you end up with `.deps/generic/a.Po'. > >> The PR asks for `generic/.deps/a.Po'. > > Rob> Yes. Simply put this breaks with any dependencies not in the > Rob> current sub-tree. And that is problematic. It _also_ leads to > Rob> multiple .Po files for a single source file, scattered around the > Rob> build environment, which 'generic/.deps/a.Po' avoids.... > > I looked at this some more. I think the dependency file should go > near the object file, not the source file. This makes a difference in > the subdir-objects case. So the idea is that if the object is > "sub/dir/file.o" then the dependency file will be > "sub/dir/.deps/file.Po". I've written a patch to do this; I'll check > it in once the regression testing is done. I think this ought to lift > the `..' restriction (except for Java, for now), which is definitely > an improvement. Thank you! BTW The location was intended to be in the build tree in the PR but I realise the PR is a little unclear. Rob
